Posted on 02/07/2007 5:27:59 AM PST by areafiftyone
Rudy Guilanni has broken out in front of the field of GOP candidates. He will soon only be able to see Senator John McCain is his rear view mirror. It had to happen.
Both men seemed to be way ahead of the rest of those who have been seriously talked about on the Republican side of our national political debates.
Nevertheless, both men came to the race dragging steamer trunks full of skeletons.
McCain has a nasty habit of putting his name on awful bills that no real Republican should vote for, let alone sponsor then have the nerve to try to get our party’s nomination. He says things that make many conservatives want to push a cream pie into his face. In short, most conservatives harbor a very strong animosity toward McCain.
A recent poll on Freerepublic.Com had four choices:
John McCain, Rudy Guilanni, Mitt Romney and “I’ll stay home”. McCain finished with just 4%, fully 20 points behind “I’ll stay home”. Freerepublic, as we know, is a very accurate reflection of true grassroots conservative opinion. Four percent on a Freep poll is deadly for anyone.
Because conservatives feel so strongly against McCain personally, it would make no difference if he proposed dropping a nuclear bomb on North Korea. It’s McCain conservatives don’t like. Nothing will change that.
Rudy Guilanni is a different story. People like Rudy very much. The question always has been: do they like him enough to over look his skeletons of being pro partial, birth abortion, pro gay “marriage”, anti second amendment and being questionable on border control.
Most conservatives have always felt that if Rudy can straighten up, act more conservative, and mean it, they would be willing to meet him somewhere in the middle on most issues. That would enable him to break this race wide open and gain the kind of edge George W. Bush enjoyed by being the only candidate far in advance of the 2000 election.
What McCain has done
John McCain has come out in strong support of the troop surge, has voted properly on it and worked hard to bolster support for the president on this issue. He still has problems. This issue will dry up and go away very soon as Senate Democrats fearfully back away from a determined Mitch McConnell on this one. Beyond that, he still has McCain - Feingold and McCain - Kennedy hanging around his neck. Not good.
What has Guilanni done.
Because he did not take the bait and challenge Hillary Clinton last November, Guilanni has no bad votes to have to explain away. He has bad prior positions that he will be repeatedly hit over the head with to be sure, but no “black letter” votes to dodge.
He has promised to appoint only Scalia, Roberts, Alito or Thomas like Supreme Court Justices. That puts the ball back into the grass root conservative’s side of the net. If they want to believe him, such a statement will do much to repair his problems on certain social issue positions.
He can now respond to questions about partial birth abortion, being anti second amendment and being for gay “marriage” with a strong clear eyed answer that will be “enough” for more and more conservatives as the specter of a Hillary Clinton presidency grows in the coming months.
That’s how Guilanni wins the nomination, now how does he win the election.
When his promise to appoint constitutionalists judges counteracts his second amendment problems, and science makes his shockingly callus support for Partial Birth Abortion moot, he will be in a very good place. The fact that the states are one by one killing the issue of “gay” marriage will complete Rudy Guilanni’s political rehabilitation.
That leaves the War on Terror and the porous border problem for Guilanni to stake out positions on.
He has stepped up on the troop surge. He is for it. That issue is his, and because of 9-11, no one can claim better War on Terror credentials than Rudy Guiliani.
He is at least as tough on illegal aliens as any other serious candidate. While the reality is that he is actually not very tough on border control, he loses no ground to anyone on this issue.
That leaves the obvious comparison to Hillary Clinton. Make no mistake, she will be their nominee.
Would Hillary Clinton appoint constitutionalist judges? No. Score a point to Guiliani.
Would Hillary Clinton be any different than Rudy on Abortion? Not much.
But neither could really do much about abortion in any case. George W. Bush hates abortion but even with a GOP congress and nominally conservative Court he has been able to do essentially nothing about abortion. No points to either.
Gay “marriage”; is fading so fast that it will be off the radar by next year. It makes no difference what Rudy thinks about it. Neither he, nor Hillary Clinton nor anybody else can revive gay “marriage”. Score no point.
How about the War on Terror? Guilanni wins that one hands down.
Clinton has already said she would surrender Iraq on Jan. 20 2009. She is against the troop build up and regrets her yes vote.
Guilanni is stronger than anyone on the national scene on the War on Terror.
He is pro build up and would be a strong leader in the WOT.
On the border problem there is at least a chance that Guilanni could be convinced that porous borders are part of the WOT. Clinton, on the other hand, would welcome illegals and register them as Democrats. Point to Guilanni.
Finally: guns
Yes both are anti gun, but neither would have very much power to do much about it. Based on the beating they took over guns in 2000 and again in 2004, the Democrats have backed off for now on gun control. These days Wayne LaPierre of the NRA has to work very hard to find things to whine about to justify asking for more money.
Does this make Rudy the less of two evils? You bet. Will I be voting for him? You bet? In our system we regularly get the lesser of two evils to vote for. If we don't vote for the lesser of two evils we guarantee getting the greater of two evils. It really is as simple as that.
(((((PING))))))
I don't see such a break out... and if so, it's far too early in the long race to matter....
Wow, people continue to confuse a Rudy win with a win for America. If he does win, so do illegals, the gay agenda, the abortionists, while law abiding citizens lose.
For Rudy to have a chance he will have to get his mind right about abortion, gay rights/marriage and gun control.
This is a true statement
Rudy's position on guns is troubling, but it also happens to be the current state of the law in this country regarding them. Unless and until the Supreme Court rules that the 2nd Amendment applies to state and local regulation, it is perfectly legal for those bodies to regulate gun ownership.
We need to get the right case in front of the Supreme Court where that ruling will be made.
"For Rudy to have a chance he will have to get his mind right about abortion, gay rights/marriage and gun control."
AH! The *teaching an old dog new tricks* notion. I'm not willing to risk 4 to 8 yrs. on a candidate who *might* change his colors.
BTW: What qualification does Rudy have to lead the most powerful country in the world? Never seem to get an answer to that question.
The only one necessary, he was born here. That's all the qual you need.
Your are right. The idea that a city or state can, in effect, make it's own interpretation of the 2d Amendment is ludicrous. The founding fathers did not say: "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. Now go do with it whatever you want."
I think I speak for a great many conservatives that I personally know (not the FR majority, but the everyday people I know), in 2000 I was first and foremost a fiscal conservative, social conservative secondly, and a security conservative third. I was, like many here at the time, pretty much an isolationist. Islamic fascism was not in my mind, and to tell the truth Osama Bin Laden probably never crossed my lips. September 11, 2001 changed everything for me. I am now a Rudyite. This is a secret I haven't even shared with my husband. He is first and for most a 2nd Amendment conservative. So for him it is a conundrum. He will vote for Rudy in the general, but not in the primaries (unless there is no choice by the time Wisconsin votes).
I feel Rudy is the best for the War on Terror. For the social conservatives, I feel your pain, but please just think about this. I would love a day that abortion is illegal, I am not for gay marriage, and I want to keep all of our guns, legally. But if we lose this war against the Islamic Fascists, we may actually gain most of the things social conservatives want, but we will be praising allah (I refuse to capitalize) instead of Thanking God. If you think this is hyperbole, please look no further than the politically correct Europe. They have been appeasing the fascists for years, and it is still not enough. The fascists are killing cartoonists, and kidnapping our people and forcing them to convert. Why will it be different here in another decade? So please think of these things when comparing the candidates for 2008, the first and foremost consideration must be our safety, and who will be the best to keep us safe. Rudy, or any of the democrats that are in the running?
OK, off my soap box now, I just wanted to explain why there are some true conservatives that will be backing Rudy.
Rudy Giuliani is in. Suggested campaign slogan: "He dealt with Brooklyn. He can handle Baghdad.'' He's not a sure thing; he has enough baggage to fill the cargo hold of a cruise ship. His sundry personal-life issues bother social conservatives; the gun control stance dismays the Second Amendment wing of the party; the pro-choice opinions alarm the evangelicals. That leaves about 47 Republicans, right? After all, it's just a party of cousin-marrying yahoos who'd sooner shoot up Planned Parenthood than vote for one of those fish-on-Friday types. Right?And then there are the othersNo. Voters are more flexible and forgiving than you might expect. And none of the objections obscure the central appeal of the Rudy candidacy: He'll nuke 'em if he has to. That won't be the central theme of his campaign, of course, but it's the unstated strength of his candidacy. He's not a wuss. Look at the rest of the field:
I guess he missed the latest poll where Rudy polls behind Hunter and Newt.
I read that thread yesterday. It was hilariously funny! One of the best I've read! Thanks! :-)
Good post! Thank you for sharing! :-)
Aside from being born in the USA, the population of New York City is larger than a lot of states. NYC, somewhere around 8 million; Arkansas, for example, <3 million.
As compared to what -- an insane asylum?
"I guess he missed the latest poll where Rudy polls behind Hunter and Newt."
Lets not leave out the most important candidate requirement, GRAVITAS! Which ones on the Republican's side have "IT". Which one will have the voters (including the independents)rushing to the polls to vote? Get one with draw power and the "I'll Stay home" types will get off their butts and vote.
"The only one necessary, he was born here. That's all the qual you need."
LOL! That's it? Well Hell, give me a couple of hundred million $$ and sign me up. I'm as qualified as Rudy for President.
Seriously, ya'll don't call youselves Conservatives in private, Right?
LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.